"If there was a god, I'd still have both nuts."
-Lance Armstrong (my boy and fellow Atheist)
2006-09-07 17:36:11 · 10 answers · asked by Toronto 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
smh73448,
That video sucked. But it is really scary that the sheep will believe whatever propaganda they're fed. I did see a few cute girls in the video though.....
2006-09-07 17:42:26 · update #1
the king of devil's Q&A,
Armstrong got testicular cancer that spread to his lungs and brain. One doctor gave him a 3% chance of living. He ended up having one testicle removed.
2006-09-07 17:43:34 · update #2
Creeklops,
But what about the countless people that died and/or lost both nuts from cancer (or died from other diseases/accidents)? I bet lots of them prayed to live, but do you hear them saying "god saved me"? No. Do you know why? Because they're dead. God is fake and Jesus never existed.
This video lasts under two minutes, give it a go:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVQoxrrMftA
2006-09-07 17:49:08 · update #3
Yah, it sums up how cruel and f*cked up god would be if he existed.
2006-09-07 17:38:12 · answer #1 · answered by Paul J 3 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Just because you ask God for something, doesn't mean you will get it. He is not a gumball machine that you put your quarter (prayer) into and out comes a gumball (or whatever you want from God). Sometimes God says yes, sometimes no, and sometimes, not now. Just because you didn't get something you asked for, doesn't mean God doesn't exist. Just because you asked your mom for a toy at the store and she said no, doesn't mean she doesn't exist.
2006-09-07 18:03:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think much of it. He should look at ot like this "I know there is a God, otherwise, I would be dead, or lost both my nuts"
2006-09-07 17:41:03 · answer #3 · answered by creeklops 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I thought it was bad I had no shoes, till I saw the man who had no feet..............or something very similar.
How about that one?
Lance could have lost both his legs...would he still have been able to win the Tour?
2006-09-07 17:39:54 · answer #4 · answered by shiba 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think what he means was articulated by Epicurus around 200BC:
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
=)
2006-09-07 17:41:25 · answer #5 · answered by SecondStar 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
That you will be the one in this video that left.
2006-09-07 17:38:01 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
don't understand what's he saying man
2006-09-07 17:38:12 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
If there wasnt.. maybe he wouldnt have any?
2006-09-07 17:41:39 · answer #8 · answered by impossble_dream 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think that he put it very well.
2006-09-07 17:38:52 · answer #9 · answered by ~ Sara ~ 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
perfectly true!
2006-09-07 17:38:34 · answer #10 · answered by mrinal1976 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋